Challenges in the Development of Market-Based Pipeline Investments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Market-based pipeline projects are initiated by the pipeline-owning company and require focused attempts to secure a customer or develop a market for the product transportation. The development of Market-based pipeline investments in the international arena has fundamental differences from projects sponsored by consumer or pipeline user needs, government endeavors or producers desiring to sell their product. Whereas these User-driven projects were the traditional way of developing projects in the past, current global political and economical trends are forcing private pipeline companies to develop new ways of creating business opportunities: the development of Market-based Pipeline Projects. A proactive strategy for developing energy transmission businesses (i.e. market-based projects) involves finding sufficient energy users and linking them with pipeline infrastructure to viable supplies of natural gas. These Market-based business opportunities are uniquely developed and require strong corporate vision and support before it can be successfully implemented. This paper will provide an insight to the challenges, risks and uncertainties to be faced when developing Market-based pipeline projects. The discussion focuses on the project development phase of the project, from the moment the business opportunity viability has been confirmed to the time when the decision is made to proceed with large capital commitments. The paper includes a description of the pipeline project development process and a review of the variables influencing important steps and decisions prior to commencement of project implementation and hence capital investments. While the content of this paper is mostly applicable to all types of pipeline projects, the discussion will focus on natural gas transmission pipelines.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".